Maintaining Genetic Integrity and Rights of Father and Child

Bills that could reunite Hartland father with his daughter headed for governor

LANSING, MI -- For a Hartland man who hasn’t seen or heard from his daughter in more than three years, he thought this day may never come.

File PhotoDaniel Quinn, formerly of Fenton, is fighting battling the state parenting act for custody of his daughter, Maeleigh, 6.

This week, state legislators forwarded a group of bills to Governor Rick Snyder that could, eventually, let Daniel Quinn reconnect with his daughter, Maeleigh.

Quinn, formerly of Fenton, has been unable to see his six-year-old daughter since Memorial Day 2008 because of a state law that assumes the child’s biological father is the husband of the child’s mother.

The ordeal started when Quinn impregnated a married woman who was, at the time, separated from her husband. The woman then reunited with her husband, taking Maeleigh with her out of the state.

Quinn, who said he supported his daughter for more than two years, wanted to be Maeleigh’s father, but a 1956 law assumes a woman’s husband is the acknowledged father of a child born while the couple are married -- even if the biological father is not the woman’s husband.

Despite a DNA test, Quinn was hamstrung by a law that he felt was out of date.

“What the laws did to me essentially tied the judge’s hands,” Quinn said. 

Quinn campaigned for a change in the laws, even testifying in front of legislators.

Now, a set of bills awaiting Snyder’s approval could change all of that.

The bills would allow an alleged father to bring legal action forward to gain paternal rights to the child, even if another man is already being acknowledged as the child’s father.

The bills received overwhelming support in both the House and Senate. They were also supported by the National Family Justice Association, Friend of the Court Association, Department of Human Services, Michigan Probate Judges Association and the Family Law Section of the Michigan State Bar.

“The bills didn’t just barely pass,” Quinn said. “It’s no longer just ignoring the fact that these problems exist.”

The Michigan National Organization for Women testified in opposition to the bills in March.

If the bills are approved by Snyder, Quinn said he would promptly petition the court to gain parental rights to his daughter.

“I want my daughter to understand we both love her,” Said Quinn in regard to the child’s mother. “Neither of us bailed on her.”

Quinn said once he has his daughter returned to him, he would work to regain her trust by listening and talking with her. After that, he said he hopes he can do the usual fathering activities, including a vacation to Disney World.

But, until that day comes, Quinn said he is trying to not get his hopes up since his fight has already brought so much disappointment.

“My fight was going to last for 18 years,” Quinn said. “My fight was going to last until my daughter knew I was fighting for her.”

Gary Ridley can be reached at 810-280-9516. You can also follow him on Twitter @GaryRidley or on Facebook.

-----------------------------------

There is a great deal to be said about those who OPPOSE this legislation. Despite their names, they are extremely anti-family and anti-parental and child rights. Their opposition shows  deep rooted bad judgment; ownership and contentiousness rather than cooperative attitudes toward parental rights.

N.O.W. in particular displays their selfish attitude toward parental rights as ownership and continues to make evident their disregard for men and fathers as unnecessary except as disposable sperm donors. They have learned nothing from the voices of the adopted and "donor" children - children cerated by selfish women with a total lack of thought or concern to the future health, welfare or emotional stability and needs of the child they create to please themsevles and their own wants, desires and needs.  Sad. Very sad how women can be self-centered and ignore what is best for their children, acting as if the child is a coffee table with ownership rights to be fought over.

Oh, yes, some will say that they are thinking of the children and "protecting" them from the "confusion" it would cause to have to explain this messy truth of their conception to them. Well, life and truth are often messy, but truth is truth and is vital for one's development, emotionally and physically when it comes to issues of their conception. It's why birth and death records are called "vital statistics."

Definition of Vital:
1. a. existing as a manifestation of life    b. concerned with or necessary to the maintenance of life vital fluids>2. characteristic of life or life giving4. fundamentally concerned with or affecting life or living beings5. of, relating to, or constituting the staining of living tissue

They aren't called "important" statistics or "necessary" statistics. They are VITAL - life altering.

And yet state government are allowed to falsely and fraudulently issue them, alter names, parental lineage, date and place of birth, destroying the vital essence of their intent.

Keeping the truth from someone on the grounds of "protection" is merely a justification to lie and deceive - and all such lies are eventually uncovered causing great feelings of BETRAYAL which is far worse than a bit of confusion. 

After all, aren't the vast majority of adopted children today expected to understand that they grew in another Mommy's tummy? if we encourage telling adopted children the truth - as we do today - how can anyone justify keeping a fact like this a secret, other than the adults to whom the truth will cause an embarrassment. Oopops, to bad and too ate. She had unprotected sex while separated from her husband. She risked a pregnancy and also risked infecting herself, her child and the husband she reunited with an STD and public humiliation.


If people chose to lie that's their personal business and that of those they lie to. but government records MUST present the TRUTH!

And double shame on N.O.W. for supporting the upholding of the very antiquated principle that all children born within a marriage are de facto "property" of the husband.